About your Search

20121202
20121210
STATION
MSNBCW 35
MSNBC 13
CNNW 8
CNN 3
CSPAN 3
CSPAN2 3
CNBC 2
FBC 1
KTVU (FOX) 1
LANGUAGE
English 82
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 82 (some duplicates have been removed)
. bottom line, i think, it's no way to govern. it is a giant mistake to have all of this in a pool of ambiguity, and as i understand it now, you would know more. i mean, it truly is a stalemate. they are not talking. >> now, you point out that it's the same player, and, i think, you'll agree player that is matter most are the president, speaker boehner. what do we know about the personal relationship that might illuminate what's going on right now? >> well, they started out last year when they were working on the debt ceiling, and they had what are calledded the merlot and nicorette's meetings. in other words, boehner would have a merlot, and obama would chew nicorette. >> you point outside in the book somehow when they took the official photo, both of those vanished. >> yes. they had iced tea there for obama. of course, boehner had his seg represent, and they put the cigarette in the ashtray away for the picture, but they have not closed the deal on the personal relations, and that's a shame. i think if somebody, instead of sponsoring your breakfast and all, sponsor a weekly dinne
of just 2.5% in the u.s., 1.5% in canada and zero growth in the uk. locally, cutbacks in government spending weighed on the numbers and lower commodity prices also impacted on cash flow and the government is facing more criticism about its effort to keep the budget in surplus while the economy grows. >> the government has had the objective of making sure that we would bring our budget back to surplus when growth has been around trend. what we've been seeking to do through good budget policy has been to provide maximum flexibility to the reserve bank to a just rate so. the government will always put in place appropriate budget settings which will support growth and jobs. >> still, analysts say growth could slow further as the mining investment boom peaks. yesterday, the bank of australia cut interest rates to a record low of 3% and traders are looking further easing next year to offset the falling talks of trade, the high australian daughter and further cutbacks in government spending. >> despite that prognosis for rates and the fact that we're now matching the record lows here, the
emerging economy. we asked about the report the government makes for business and enterprise. it is fair to say that his answer has captured the imagination of all political parties that will respond formally in the spring. so here's what we will do now. first, government spending should be alone with the business community. we will provide new money to support the partnerships. from april 2015, the governmental elites one of the funding and get people back to work. the gross funds are having businesses get back into the game. we are going to support businesses and technologies where britain has a clear technology advantage. we will extend our global lead in aerospace and support the supply chain for advanced infection. we've also support british companies to new emerging markets in asia and africa and the americas. and increasing the funding for the uk by over 25% a year. so they can help more firms build the capacity of overseas british chambers and maintain our country's position as the number one destination in europe for foreign investment. we are launching a new 1.5 billion pounds
violates the due process law. quote, liberty protects the person from unwarranted government intrusions. freedom extends upon spatial bounds. liberty presumes an autonomy of self that includes freedom of thought, belief, expression, and certain intimate conduct. the defendants are adults, and their conduct was in private and consensual, and, quote, to declare the issue as one related to the right to engage in certain sexual conduct demeans the claim the individual put forward. so could it happen? could it happen next year? that the supreme court declare it is unconstitutional to deny people of the same sex the right to marry? what a question, what a story. joining me now is the president of the human rights campaign, chad griffin, and gay rights advocate elizabeth birch. i hope i set it up as best i could. i can't write the majority opinion next year. i think i know what the majority opinion should look like. your thoughts? >> i couldn't have said it better, chris. it really is an incredible day today, that the supreme court is taking the prop 8 case, the perry case, as well as the doma
liberty protects the person from unwarranted government intrusions and freedom extends beyond spatial bounds, liberty presumes an autonomy of self-that includes freedom of thought, belief and expression. that certain intimate conduct the defendants are adults and their ability to declare the issue as one related to the right of engaging in certain sexual conduct de means the claim the claimant brought forward. what a story. joining me now, chad griffin and gay rights advocate, elizabeth bench. i hope i set it up the best i can. i can't write the majority opinion next year. your thoughts? >> i couldn't have said it better. it is an incredible day the supreme court is taking the prop 8 case as well as the doma case. when this case was filed almost four years ago, the prop 8 case, we made the case in court. in this country, we don't deny our citizens a fundamental right. the supreme court has called marriage a fundamental right no less than 14 times in this country. i'm optimistic once the court hears this doma case they will come down on freedom and libberality as they have. >> elizabet
in just a little bit more of their fair share, that would fund the government for only 8. 5 daition. it's not realistic. >> no. it's rubbish, all this. that so called buffett tax, if you implement that on warren buffett and all his pals, it will pay off obama's 2011 deficit in the year 2520 circumstance, in 514 years time, and then we'll need the next half millenium to pay off his 2012 deficit. >> i think the republicans were sent there with a mandate as well as president. obviously the american people voted for the status quo. they voted for divided government. here's the question i have. i would no want them to think os and grand hides and the slem hammer we're robbing them with. if obama wants to take the country off the fiscal cliff, they need to go there. they seem afraid of that. do you see that. >> it's clear from the election that the majority of americans essentially voted for european levels of spending. you can't have european levels of spending. we're one percent under canada. there's no difference any more, not in terms of government spending. we're close to norway. we're n
republicans hate government and that's why they don't run it very well. >> but they hate government so that's why they don't run it very well. >> right. >> bill press said you can't be in washington without giving you opinion about whether or not we're going off the fiscal cliff, blah, blah blah. and i said the democrats tend to be the responsible party in terms of wanting to govern and then bill says because they hate it, and i say right. why would you make some big operate well that you don't like. >> you are a couple of marksists. >> what did reagan say? the government is the problem. >> right. they don't like the government. >> and i don't suppose the government is anything anybody would ever want to strangle in the bathtub. >> stephanie: no. all right. let's dive in to right-wing world. [♪ circus music ♪] >> stephanie: all right. rush limbaugh. >> folks i'm a little worn-out fed up and very inpatient with these ongoing assaults on the people who work in this country. the current disaster is not teaching people a lesson, nothing will. we're not teaching people to be
. where are we going to get it? coming from the government, everybody thinks that are entitled to something. thank you for the call. the top solution is to break the congressional gridlock. north dakota on the democrats' line. caller: good morning. the number one priority is bringing jobs home from china. host: you are on the air. go ahead, roger. caller: these people that sold our country out, they need to be exiled to themselves. host: good morning on the independent line. what is the number-one priority as the president embarks on a second term? caller: the issue a want to talk about this morning is one both sides agree with. everybody agrees but the tax code needs to be reformed, simplified. it needs to be changed in a permanent way where businessmen and individuals can plan for the future. there are multiple ways to do this, cut in reductions, giving everybody a fair chance to the tax code. i think it will really chance the economy. put it on a solid basis for businesses to plan and go into the future with. host: what do you think the president's number one priority should
's this last group who are willing to compromise and combine their ideologies with governing. it is this group bit by bit who are peeling away the extreme views of the rest of the party. the most important question remains are there enough of them to make a deal and reign in the g.o.p. circus. joining me now charles pierce, writer to esquire and author and host of ring of fire and majority report sam seder. do you feel sorry for john boehner who has all these circus folks with him? >> i don't. >> eliot: shocking to me. >> look, he has--he's trying to maintain his caucus, and you know at the end of the day i don't really invest too heavily about the actual persons of these politicians. the fact that you were talking about lindsey graham who pressureperceived-- >> eliot: i was setting him up to tear him down. >> the point is he's facing re-election. the republican electorate that the republicans have nurtured and grown. they have created frankenstein, i've said it before on this program, and basically they're at the mercy of these people. they created this monster and they can't put it back in t
not focused enough on what the government can be doing to try to spur job growth? beyond just -- >> there was a stimulus piece in the offer from the white house that was laughed at by the -- >> laughed at but could end up surviving. one of the things about the president's initial offer is it may have sent a bad signal to conservatives but it did have the effect of getting his folks behind him and really solidifying that base it felt in the past he gives too much and doesn't go for big enough in the beginning. this whole question of what, if anything government can do to try to stimulate additional job growth, something that he as president has to be thinking about, even if he believes, and i think he does, the economy is turning around if we can get this debt piece off the table, that it's going to free up more economic activity. but there's still a lot of caution on the part of business. >> and looking down the road, chris cizilla, the president also has a lot of foreign policy challenges, there's a threat of another nuclear weapons test from north korea, you've got chemical
unwarranted government intrusions, freedom extends upon spatial bounds. liberty presumes an autonomy ofself that includes freedom of thought, belief, expression, and certain intimate conduct. the defendants are adults and their conduct was in private and consensual, and, quote, to declare the issue as one related to the right to engage in certain sexual conduct demeans the claim the individual put forward. so could it happen? could it happen next year? that the supreme court declare it is unconstitutional to deny people of the same sex the right to marry? one a question, what a story. joining me now is the president of the human rights campaign chad griffin and gay rights advocate elizabeth birch. i think i know what the majority opinion should look like. your thoughts. >> i couldn't have said it better, chris. it really is an incredible day today, that the supreme court is taking the prop 8 case, the perry case, as well as the doma case. and, you know, look, when this case was filed almost four years ago, the prop 8 case, we made the case in court that in this country we don't deny our cit
that when it's all said and done, the government could save $5.7 billion. but those 65 and 66-year-olds don't disappear. they are still going to be here and get sick sometimes which means the savings we'd see by kicking them off they pop back up elsewhere in the economy. it's not pure savings, it's a cost shift. you're going to see increased costs for seniors who will have to find another health insurer since it uses power to pay less by quite a bit. the seniors turning to private insurance will have to pay more from the same coverage. 3.7 billion more in the first year of the policy. for those who are eligible for medicaid, will move to the states, we think. then there are the employers. many of the ineligible will turn to their employers. that will increase the health care costs of companies by $5.4 billion. some of the seniors will turn to the affordable care act in the insurance exchanges. those left in medicare will pay a higher premium because the average premiums go up for those older and sicker. that will cost $2.5 billion. in order to save the federal government $5.7 billion this p
from the white house was let's fix this problem by incorporating a small businesses and less government intervention to curb the deficit. it has been astronomical. then i heard barack obama say the way we are going to do it is by making more cuts in various ways. he was saying by making more cuts and the only people it is going to hurt is the working class and somewhat of the middle-class. he should mention the fact that out of control spending has a lot to do with the credit card crunch. specifically because of the middle-class. i think if we get those tax cuts centered with them, i do not think the poll would be affected. you have these small companies that are developing, and he is saying have those small companies hire more people and get them involved, but come consumer expenditures. that is partially i think a solution. host: you are calling on the republican line and you think hillary clinton would make a good candidate. would you vote for her in 2016? caller: i think she would be a very vital aspect to the political process. as far as her running for president, 2016 -- god knows
the size of government. and i welcome that. he's choosing to do it outside now rather than inside the senate but he's had a huge, positive influence on the senate and we're going to continue to see that for years to come. >> senator, this may seem like a simple question, but i wonder, and a lot of people do is the senate from your perspective, is the senate a difficult place to be if you are someone who comes from executive background or someone committed to getting things done? is it a frustrating place to exist, day in and day out? >> i would say to you, i saw the article that you wrote earlier today, governors do -- who are used to having their own planes and flying around their states and controlling their own schedules do find it more challenging in the senate. i came from the state senate in wyoming. i enjoyed the opportunity to work with people on both side of the aisle to discuss the issues and continue to try to move proposals forward that i believe in about. i believe this is a place where you can make an effective difference in the direction of the country. >> now, let'
place in government. >> including at a federal level? >> including at the federal level. that's what elections are. collective bargaining. >> house democratic leader nancy pelosi pointed out jim demint was one of the ringleaders in voting down the u.n. treaty for people with disabilities this week. >> that was one of the saddest days, so anyone who was a party to that, well, i wish them well wherever they are going and hope that we can have more of our values represented there. >> it was demint and his tea party allies who pushed the country to the brink of default back in 2011. this is what demint told abc news about republicans who tried to strike a debt deal. >> what happens if -- what happens to republicans who go along with a debt ceiling increase? if they go along with the debt ceiling increase without a balanced budget amendment and the kind of stuff you're talking about? >> i think for the most part they're gone. it would be the most toxic vote we could take. >> demint's far right ideology is a key reason nothing gets done in this congress. house speaker john boehner is curre
. but sounding off, chanting anti-government and anti-president slogans. they've left that area, but the opposition still out here protesting against the president in tahrir square. >> we'll keep a close eye on that situation. i'm brooke baldwin in atlanta. thanks for being with me. let's go to wolf blitzer. "the situation room" begins right now. >>> happening now, president obama says we're out of time for anything but a down payment for solving the nation's spending crisis. >>> amid fears, the government may resort to chemical weapons, nato says yes to turkey to giving them patriot missiles. we'll talk to the former british prime minister, tony blair. >>> as they await a new heir to the throne, the british consider changing the rules about who can become king or queen. i'm wolf blitzer. you're in "the situation room." >>> we begin with president obama's latest ideas for getting past the standoff with house republicans. he now says there isn't enough time left to do a comprehensive deal, including tax reform, fixing medicare. so he wants congress to raise tax rates for the weal
government goes in there and raids these clubs. if the state is a player, the feds largely are hands-off. >> help me out here. so in washington state and colorado, it's not only legal toto i am bible or to smoke. right? but it's legal to grow? >> it's legal to grow in colorado. washington state does not allow home-grown cultivation. >> they are importing it from where? >> it will be grown in washington in cultivation centers. >> i see but not at home? >> you can grow up to six plants at home in washington. >> in colorado? >> yeah. >> and then you can legally sell it and the state gets a sales tax. >> that's right. in one year because they have to put the regulations out, promulgate them and fight and all, but more or less a year from now people will be able to go into these places like you and i can get alcohol and tobacco on and caffeine and use it possibly in a private setting. you can't use it like in a coffee-shop setting like in amsterdam. >> by the way, i was in amsterdam 10 days ago. i looked for one of those damn pot coffee shops. carol and i
in dollar value from the federal government than they pay back in taxes. so we're going to a majority of takers versus makers in america. >> chasing ever-higher spending with ever-higher tax rates will decrease the number of makers in society and increase the number of takers. >> we do not have a nation, a majority of takers, we want to have a majority of makers. >> to hear paul ryan take it, a sizable chunk of the american people are nothing but freeloaders, mooching off the productive folks at the top. that kind of talk made him the perfect partner for mitt romney, didn't it? but wait a minute, that was the old paul ryan, we've got a new and improved paul ryan and he's singing a much different tune. last night in his first address since the republican's defeat, romney gave some veiled criticism of his former running mate's 47% remarks by offering this. >> both parties tend to divide americans into our voters and their voters. let's be really clear. republicans must steer far clear of that trap. we must speak to the aspirations and the anxieties of every american. >> but you didn't.
the government, but soon they could face a weapon even deadlier than any they've seen so far. cnn's pentagon correspondent barbara starr is joining us with the latest new threat on the possible use of chemical weapons. >> reporter: wolf, the challenge is for the obama administration to figure out exactly what bashar al assad is up to with his deadly arsenal. the horror remains unspeakable. 25 years ago saddam hussein unleashed one of the worst poison gas attacks in history. thousands were killed. now, in syria, u.s. concerns are growing by the hour that bashar al assad may be planning the same thing against his citizens. >> the intelligence that we have raises serious concerns that this is being considered. >> reporter: u.s. intelligence shows syria has mixed chemical compounds needed to make a deadly agent that can quickly kill thousands. >> the united states and our allies are facing the prospect of an imminent use of weapons of mass destruction in syria. and this may be the last warning we get. >> reporter: the u.s. is not precisely saying what the syrians are doing, but there are two way
, alexander hamilton, observe energy is a leading character in good government. the president must lead in a divided government and must not advocate his or her -- not abdicate hor or her responsibility. president obama has the responsibility to propose a real bipartisan plan to avert the fiscal cliff that can pass both the house and the senate. withdrawing from the recommendations of the simpson- from thewing recommendations of the simpson- bowles commission, the president could propose a plan that would not only avert the so-called fiscal cliff, but also help us avert the fiscal abyss. if president obama were to offer such a plan, republicans would act favorably. going over the cliff is unnecessary. as it has been observed in "the wall street journal," the president is boxing in the republicans. he is offering them a deal they cannot accept. first, the president has repeatedly called for a balanced solution involving both revenue and less spending. what is obvious to the most casual observer is that this plan is not a balanced. the fiscal cliff involves nearly four dollars of anticipa
. >> there is no responsible way we can govern this country with those low rates in place for future generations. those rates are going to have to go up. >> house speaker john boehner appears to be struggling now that the president and democrats are negotiating for a position of power. talking points memo points out republicans are used to getting 70% to 75% of what they ask for in these types of negotiations but now speaker boehner is going on and on about how he's shocked and amazed at president's plan and is refusing to offer a counter plan on the republican side. you want to talk about this or anything else, join us online at current.com/stephaniemiller. we'll see you with more after the break. kind of guys who do like reverse mortgage commercials? those types are coming on to me all of the time now. >> she gets the comedians laughing... >> that's hilarious! >> ...and the thinkers, thinking. >> okay, so there is wiggle-room in the ten commandments, is what you're telling me. >> she's joy behar. >> and the best part is that current will let me say anything. >> wh
-pays for those who can afford it. donald trump may need medication but he certainly doesn't need the government to pay for it. debt ceiling talks in the summer of 2011 geithner again ruled that out. >> not as part of a process to reduce the deficit the others face. >> republicans don't like owning reform either. this was tom cole on sunday. >> only obama can fix entitlements. democrat versus democrat fight over entitlement which mirrors their fighting over taxes. a response to an argument that was starting before former adviser steve ratner and minnesota democratic congressman keith ellison with near glee. there is no real choice about that. we're clear social security is off the table. this is, to me, the much more interesting debate between tom and dan. >> you want republicans arguing. both sides are also battling for control of the debt ceiling which may represent the republicans' greatest point of leverage in these budget talks. goo the speaker of the house says that's a nonstarter. >> silliness. congress will never give up the power. i've made it clear to the president. we need cuts in ref
, there will be hell to pay for all of us. you know who will pay? the people running the government. the politicians. good politicians don't take their countries off of cliffs. "the ed show" starts right now. >>> good evening, americans. welcome to "the ed show" live from washington, d.c. tonight, breaking news from the nation's capital. house democrats are turning the screws on house speaker bain. this is "the ed show." let's get to work. >> unfortunately, the speaker's proposal is still out of balance. >> the president responds to john boehner, but democratic leader nancy pelosi has a plan to get around the speaker. tonight, leader pelosi joins me for an exclusive interview. >>> senator john kerry like you have never seen him before. the statesman from massachusetts scolds the radical right after senate republicans block a u.n. treaty on rights for the disabled because they are concerned about home schooling. you don't want to miss this tape. >>> plus my interview with ohio senator sherrod brown on what looks like a massive win for progressives and elizabeth warren. >>> then senator debbi stabenow
states government. there's nothing in the constitution that talks about a debt ceiling. this has become kind of in the past a pro forma process that has now turned into a financial armageddon each time it comes about and i do think granting the president these additional rights and then allowing congress with a two-thirds vote to say, hold on here, that might be a more appropriate way regardless of who is the president is. but i don't think yesterday's antics have that much to do with at least the current stage of the boehner/obama discussions. >> let's talk about the current stage. "new york times" saying it's one on one right now with the speaker and the president yet some leading democrats are saying, no, that's not the case. that they are still involved in the process. what do you know about that? >> well, it seems to me it's a pretty close circle at this point. an awful lot of us have been involved in the bipartisan efforts for 2 1/2 years. we understand that it's important to give the president and speaker some space. those of us who actually have plans that were north of $4 trill
paying more or sometimes all of their medical expenses, it makes no sense for the government to pay medicare costs for someone earning $700,000 a year. so i think we can do some means testing. but by no means am i saying it should be low enough so our elderly and poorist americans are going to pay for the deficit. but we want a deal. and keep in mind, i think this is very important. if the bush tax cuts are expired, as they will be, just as sure as today is friday, they are gone, that generates $950 billion toward the deficit over a ten-year period. we'd set aside $1.2 trillion. we're almost there. and if you do means testing on medicare, we make it. >> well, the republicans would never go along with that kind of means testing because that would hit the wealthier americans. that's who they are going to protect. how would that work out? >> what i would hope is if republicans fight a deal like that because they want to protect the wealthiest, i think the american public is going to see through that and they are going to become vocal. the mail we're getting from all over the country su
millions and his work. marco rubio, pat toomey. very conservative, anti-tax, anti-government purists in the mold of jim demint. however, he also backed in republican primaries a number of republican candidates who simply were not electable according to the republican establishment and the establishment was right. for example, remember christine o'donnell, i'm not a witch, from delaware. ken buck of colorado. and others. so those are some of the reasons why he definitely has ruffled many a-feather with the party leaders and i have to tell you first thing i saw when the senate republican leader mitch mcconnell released a statement today was making the point that demint had, quote, uncompromising service. didn't have to read between the lines too much to see there's a backhanded compliment. >> dana, what about bigger picture here and talking about the republican party aenl just talking about folks like ryan and rubio, let's say, part of maybe the next generation republicans. do you think that demint's brand of republicanism is falling out of favor with sort of the newer version of what
and done, the government could save $5.7 billion in the first year of that plan. but those 65 and 66-year-olds they don't disappear. they are still going to be here and they are even going to get sick sometimes, which means the savings we'd see by kicking them off medicare rolls will pop back up in the economy. it's not pure savings, it's a cost shift. first and foremost, you're going to see increased costs for seniors who will have to find another health insurer since medicare is huge and uses its bargaining power to pay less by quite a bit. the seniors turning to private insurance will have to pay more for the same coverage. 3.7 billion more in the first year of the policy. for those 65 and 66 years old who are eligible for medicaid, states will have to pick up some of that tab. so three-quarters of a billion dollars will pick up that tab, we think. then there are the employers. many of the ineligible will turn to their employers. that will increase the health care costs of companies by $4.5 billion. some of the seniors will turn to the affordable care act raising premiums for young peo
to reduce government spending. >> i don't want to belabor the point on people going home but i assume an awful lot of members who have gone home are hearing from their constituents, go back and go to work and solve the problem here, rise above the partisan rancor. >> yes. >> the congress was on a holiday for thanksgiving not that long ago. let's talk though about three areas of real critical importance in this discussion. one is what would you do with respect to reducing the growth of spending in medicare? what specific steps are you willing to put on the table? >> well, let me give you something that -- it's very sensitive. but end of life is where 70% of the medicare dollars go, and yet we have a society where most people will not do a living will. i did a living will with my 90-year-old dad. it was very difficult. he died shortly after. but he told me, hey, do not keep me on life support, it costs a lot of money, plus i don't want it. if do you it, i'll come back and haunt you. but it was a good process. i see as a member of congress so many people who are estranged from their pare
job of -- a limited government, free enterprise. we need to improve on the way we connect those policies to everyday lives of everyday people spent why has there been a failure? >> i'm not sure there's one issue for it but i'm not sure there's one reason for and i haven't had time to think about why this. but it needs to happen because i truly believe that principles we stand for are the only way, free enterprise limited government is the only way for us to stabilize and grow our middle class which is what we hope every american does. >> how worried are you of the consequences of the republican party -- [inaudible] >> i don't know about, even from the voters perspective? you mean changes in the demographic changes? you know, i'm not, i do think any voter in america, the our voters are locked into one party or the other, but the fastest-growing group of voters our voters are not in parties. what your looking for people who understand the issues ending anxieties they hope in the hopes they have. offer real and concrete policy solutions and a real role for government, appropriate r
the federal government -- the politicians here members of congress can't get their act together. but at any rate, you had one plan on the table. the president's plan. republicans saying the president -- there are too many questions and there's not enough specificity and -- baloney. president put out a plan about a year ago. it is in print. it is online. the president has a very specific plan. the republicans who didn't put anything on the table who had not countered with anything concrete at all. in fact, yesterday at our briefing, before boehner released his counter plan, jay carney said again that all you hear from the republicans are vague promises. >> you're making vague promises about achieving revenue through capping deductions or closing loopholes simply doesn't add up to a serious proposal. >> bill: so then yesterday the republicans realized they had to come up with something put something on the table. come up with this proposal which would cut $2.2 trillion over the next ten years. the president by the
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 82 (some duplicates have been removed)

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)